In 1960, the PRI was almost total control, but this time, the University begins to awaken, arise movements and popular science education in Michoacan and Chihuahua, the growth of these movements also affect the state student morale UNAM, where a strike specific questions the curriculum profile raised by the state and brings the movement to fight for a new type of school. So IPN was affected, as in the height of the struggle to be successful despite the strike FNET solidarity with the School of Agriculture in Ciudad Juarez.
whole process of radicalization is accompanied by increasing repression in the city and country, then the student movement becomes a sounding board for the widespread discontent. The apparent social stability was sustained by the systematic repression and persecution of those who dare to become leaders. The economic miracle was only for the capitalists and the situation looked like a boiler about to explode. The chain was so tight that it would break the weakest link, where state control and the experience of defeats were less present. That link, that was the student movement fresh.
At this time there was a student organization run by the Mexican Communist Party (NCED), which nevertheless meant a democratic choice in the midst of a series of corporate organizations PRI. But even NCED could imagine the movement that was brewing and the implications. Activists and leaders of the PCM in the student movement were as clueless as anyone else, and reached the critical moment, assumed positions of reconciliation with the state. The fight once again put him in the place they deserved, they were more worried about their device for revolution.
student movement of 1968 took everyone by surprise. All student organizations were exceeded, while the PRI control device on the student movement was cracking, as was the case of FNET, which collapsed completely. And in the far-right groups in the UNAM suffered no better fate.
The movement's demands were essentially political, it also marking a difference with respect earlier movements. Sympathy for the movement spread through various sectors and between workers. The ascent of the movement was becoming increasingly dangerous for the government.
The creation of the National Strike Council was the main expression of the need for a unified national leadership of the movement, goes to school committees, choosing General Assembly through its representatives to the NHC, which are revocable at any time. However
68 also is an example of what can happen if there is a vanguard capable of producing an analysis that is realized in a program and correct tactics to confront a reality seizure. Although this is quite logical, the problem is that at the end of it nobody is able to obtain organizational conclusions necessary to give continuity to the movement.
With regard to the State, this shows your true character of the repressive apparatus of the ruling class, the Tlatelolco massacre and the arrest of almost all student leaders. The uncertainty is rife in the environment and in a few months is dissolved CNH. This movement gradually fades, student leaders draw conclusions completely contrary to what the situation required. Instead of consolidating the single, centralized organization, the destroyed and proclaimed the end of the organizations with structure and permanent address, leaving the movement at the mercy of improvisation, inexperience and ineptitude of the lot came to assume that the "direction".
Meanwhile the state aims "to cover his eye on the male", waging a populist educational reform, and suggests the possibility of the emergence of political parties. However, this is just demagoguery, as is repeated for 1971 massacre on June 10, marking the end of an era of unified struggle by the ME.
despair Impotence occurs which causes the emergence of ultra-radical currents, although many word call themselves Marxist-Leninists, in fact become isolated terrorist organizations and social movements that reach beyond become a pretext for the state to exercise a brutal repression against the social movement.
Others with the idea of \u200b\u200bgoing to the people, leave school and become farmers or workers. However, due to ideological confusion remnant, and not make significant contributions in the peasant movement and the labor movement, which shows that without correct ideas activism itself is useless.
Others think that the transition of young people in school should serve primarily to acquire training policy that would allow them to be truly useful to join the political struggle outside of school.
Control Committees formed in 68 gradually disappear. Rise and fall organizations of all types and trends, but all have the characteristic that they have no prospect of movement in general and less approach to unify the struggles, despite the dispersion, to keep giving throughout the country.
Only a few organizations were able to consolidate economic and political autonomy from the state and a fairly broad base of support, could survive this process, as was the case of several committees Fight the Polytechnic.
Others with the idea of \u200b\u200bgoing to the people, leave school and become farmers or workers. However, due to ideological confusion remnant, and not make significant contributions in the peasant movement and the labor movement, which shows that without correct ideas activism itself is useless.
Others think that the transition of young people in school should serve primarily to acquire training policy that would allow them to be truly useful to join the political struggle outside of school.
Control Committees formed in 68 gradually disappear. Rise and fall organizations of all types and trends, but all have the characteristic that they have no prospect of movement in general and less approach to unify the struggles, despite the dispersion, to keep giving throughout the country.
Only a few organizations were able to consolidate economic and political autonomy from the state and a fairly broad base of support, could survive this process, as was the case of several committees Fight the Polytechnic.
end of the seventies there are new attempts to organize students nationally (ONE UPÓME). Then comes the debate about the type of organization, if it is mass or frame. The debate was lost in the measure never exceeded a handful of isolated schools, and never sign a movement to take hold of that organization so often projected in the consciousness of students as a benchmark nationally. Today we have indeed that possibility.
The first half of the eighties can be considered relatively inactive. Many organizations were born and died in the span of a generation and the dispersion process was exacerbated She seemed by some impressionists that the thing was finished, but for Marxists the situation is not so simple, in reality economic conditions determined by the capitalist model established from the forties and the framework of the international crisis triggered a process in young and pissed off workers who expected only a pretext for expression. Solidarity brought about by the earthquake of 85 gave only a small example of what began to happen. The state had a hard time taking control of the movement. People for a moment he realized he did not need the bourgeoisie and its state for nothing.
The movement was rising and the outbreak of the conference marked the top 86-87.
Changing economic project required a change of educational project. In 1986 it was in the UNAM where the state wanted to start this transformation, clutchless this project involved a direct attack against the permanence of the children of workers at the university, so that the response to Carpizo plan was absolute and overwhelming: the wrath of the vast majority of students forced the activist groups to forget feuds and accept a general coordination, which is given through the reactivation of the Student Council (EWC), a body which unfortunately always stay at the level of an assembly of coordination. While there was movement coordination, the CEU was helpful. The movement succeeded in pushing back the plan Carpizo, once completed without clutch and without the pressure of the masses, the leaders gave vent to their sectarian practices to make the CEU in an assembly of activists who meet only when the situation has become almost desperate.
E! CEU was not an organization, it was a meeting of activists, however the students then and now we are seeing as a reference point and try to revive it when the fight is urgent.
The Polytechnic was influenced by the popular movement, however also made the same mistakes, which eventually led to even greater dispersion after completion of the popular movement.
This period was characterized by the defense of the gains students achieved at other times, so the struggle took on a purely defensive. In addition to not advance a political level, the leaders argued that the movement should be purely academic or student, plus each institution framework for action, was limited to their immediate environment, leading to an isolation from the situation of students national, let alone with respect to the general movement.
unified struggle is disregarded, as partial successes, create the illusion that one school is able to solve their problems outside of others. What happened with Congress and the Polytechnic University, demonstrated the fallacy of these conclusions.
Thus we come to the nineties. The momentum of the movement is still allowed some partial victories, but the dispersion is deepened, the Salinas achievement impose a constitutional change to the Third Section with the support of some opposition deputies. The salinato proclaimed his victory and seemed to seize all impotence. Some, attracted by the siren song, fell in deception and others were co-opted. Falling countries of Eastern Europe at the hands of the capitalist counterrevolution caused dismay in many sectors of youth and workers, however the recent events are beginning to awaken the masses and fight new horizons approach in our power to learn history and to build the future.
The first half of the eighties can be considered relatively inactive. Many organizations were born and died in the span of a generation and the dispersion process was exacerbated She seemed by some impressionists that the thing was finished, but for Marxists the situation is not so simple, in reality economic conditions determined by the capitalist model established from the forties and the framework of the international crisis triggered a process in young and pissed off workers who expected only a pretext for expression. Solidarity brought about by the earthquake of 85 gave only a small example of what began to happen. The state had a hard time taking control of the movement. People for a moment he realized he did not need the bourgeoisie and its state for nothing.
The movement was rising and the outbreak of the conference marked the top 86-87.
Changing economic project required a change of educational project. In 1986 it was in the UNAM where the state wanted to start this transformation, clutchless this project involved a direct attack against the permanence of the children of workers at the university, so that the response to Carpizo plan was absolute and overwhelming: the wrath of the vast majority of students forced the activist groups to forget feuds and accept a general coordination, which is given through the reactivation of the Student Council (EWC), a body which unfortunately always stay at the level of an assembly of coordination. While there was movement coordination, the CEU was helpful. The movement succeeded in pushing back the plan Carpizo, once completed without clutch and without the pressure of the masses, the leaders gave vent to their sectarian practices to make the CEU in an assembly of activists who meet only when the situation has become almost desperate.
E! CEU was not an organization, it was a meeting of activists, however the students then and now we are seeing as a reference point and try to revive it when the fight is urgent.
The Polytechnic was influenced by the popular movement, however also made the same mistakes, which eventually led to even greater dispersion after completion of the popular movement.
This period was characterized by the defense of the gains students achieved at other times, so the struggle took on a purely defensive. In addition to not advance a political level, the leaders argued that the movement should be purely academic or student, plus each institution framework for action, was limited to their immediate environment, leading to an isolation from the situation of students national, let alone with respect to the general movement.
unified struggle is disregarded, as partial successes, create the illusion that one school is able to solve their problems outside of others. What happened with Congress and the Polytechnic University, demonstrated the fallacy of these conclusions.
Thus we come to the nineties. The momentum of the movement is still allowed some partial victories, but the dispersion is deepened, the Salinas achievement impose a constitutional change to the Third Section with the support of some opposition deputies. The salinato proclaimed his victory and seemed to seize all impotence. Some, attracted by the siren song, fell in deception and others were co-opted. Falling countries of Eastern Europe at the hands of the capitalist counterrevolution caused dismay in many sectors of youth and workers, however the recent events are beginning to awaken the masses and fight new horizons approach in our power to learn history and to build the future.
0 comments:
Post a Comment